Russians ads swung the 2016 election

From iGeek
Jump to: navigation, search

There was like $6.8B spent on the election versus you have like $50,000 spent on a few troll ads on FB-- most of them were before/during the primaries (or after the election) and they were spent on things the Democrats usually support (Black Lives Matter, anti-America, anti-interventionism, etc). All things the Democrats support. They weren't campaigning for Trump, they were slamming everything, or trying to insight unrest, and undermine confidence in everything.

So when someone claims the Russians swung the election because of their Facebook ad spending, they are claiming that a few Russian trolls throwing random shit-memes are 68,000 times more effective in their ad spends than the entire American political system at swaying voters? If so, then they deserve to win.

Russian Facebook Ad Buy

Is there anyone dumb enough that knows the numbers/scale and still thinks that FB was able to influence the election in Trumps favor?

The media is acting like there's some big scandal around Facebook allowing a micro-fraction of their ads, or some fake accounts, impacted the 2016 election. It's all garbage:

  1. Scale makes this irrelevant
  2. There's no evidence it mattered at all in the election
  3. It was done mostly before the primary or after election
  4. Most of the ads weren't against Hillary or supported DNC causes.

So this is flim-flamming excuses by her troll army, or those unwilling to admit that she was just a bad candidate.

Hillary started the fake Russia thing via Pete Brognitz (June 2015) -- because polling showed her top weakness was on Uranium One (20% of Uranium) and colluding with the Russians. So their defense was to claim the other side did it too/first/etc., to distract/weaken the attack against her. Podesta emails proved it. This is Hillary's usual gaslighting tactic. [1] And the whole thing HELPS the Russians.

Remember the Russian goals:

  1. Sow division using identity politics (to polarize the nation)
  2. Sensationalize insignificant non-events using the media to sow fear/hate/divisions
  3. Undermine the election results
  4. Magnify wild conspiracy theories

This is the message as the DNC and BLM. Thus the Russians ad buy was economically and politically irrelevant -- and it was targeted towards Hillary's causes more than Trump's. So much for that collusion theory. That was what the media and Facebook did, with this whole Russian trolls/ads thing -- them sensationalizing either BLM, DNC and other progressive talking point (saying the same things as the Russians wanted), made a far bigger impact. So which is it? Should we care and get pissed at FB/Media/DNC? Or should we not care, and they're all fools, frauds and liars? Pick one.

What were the ads about? You never hear those facts in the mainstream media. Why? Because it blows apart their narrative.

The ads run were mostly to amplify political discord and fuel an atmosphere of incivility and chaos. In other words, the DNC platform.

Progressives want their version of "Progress" or change. You can't get change by claiming things are great. So the DNC/Progressive platform is to exaggerate our problems, and make everything seem like the end of the world and how bad things are, so they can demand we need progressive leaders and more government to fix it. The Russians want to make everything seem like the end of the world and how bad things are, so they can point out the failures of the west, or keep them distracted. While the ends are different, the means are the exact same. The Russians were colluding with the DNC. The only question is whether the DNC knew about it or cared.

So the ads run by the Russians were mostly supporting Democrat agenda, like running BLM ads on Facebook in Ferguson and Baltimore. How is sending the same message as the DNC was, trying to promote the anti-American ideas that we're a racist country, that the government abuses its people and thus we need more government, and other things that are part of the DNC platform, undermining Hillary or helping Donald Trump?

Facebook is 3 things: bad interface, bad management, and biased policies. I want a social network that gives me control of what I see and share -- both to my friends and to advertisers. I realize they need to make a buck, and my information is their product, but the point is you can still give users the illusions of control. But Zuckerberg seems to have falling into the egocentric pit that many young billionaires do, they think because they timed things well, and worked hard, and got lucky that they're smarter than everyone else. This makes them arrogant, less mature, and slower to grow than the average human: Dunning-Kruger, inflated by being surrounded by yes-men.



📚 References
  1. Gaslighting:

More Links